Who would benefit from a Broadway subway?

Once again, I’m deeply puzzled by the anger of the opposition people have to the idea of a Broadway subway line. Part of the anger, if not all, seems to come from some real confusion about who would benefit from it. Here’s Zweisystem:

The promoters of the a UBC subway and the SkyTrain Lobby will delight at the fact that once again taxpayers who live outside of Vancouver, with no say on how transit is provided inside Vancouver will see massive tax and user fee increases to fund a subway to UBC that they will seldom, if ever use.

People from outside of Vancouver would “seldom, if ever,” use a Broadway subway? Really? Who are those massive crowds of people getting off the Expo line at Commercial-Broadway and seeing two- and three-sailing waits to get on a B-Line? Did they all get on the Skytrain at Joyce-Collingwood? Really?

Those crowds don’t by any means make a knock-down case for a subway, but let’s try to get some perspective on who’s going to benefit from a Broadway rail line, regardless of whether it’s light rail or a subway. People in the city aren’t the only ones who stand to gain here.

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

8 Responses to “Who would benefit from a Broadway subway?”

Yup. Building entire networks that go where people work and live is necessary in order to make a whole system work. Who’s going to get on a fancy new light rail, BRT or skytrain line in Surrey if it doesn’t connect to something that can take them to their job?

Tessa — This a really good point, and I feel a bit thick for not having thought it through myself. The rationing by queuing propagates back through the system, so the the B-Line bottleneck might even be depressing ridership on the E & M Lines.

Thanks. I’ve actually been wondering (And I’m surprised no one has looked into this yet that I can tell) whether or not the opening of the Canada Line has had any noticeable impact on the ridership of the millenium or expo lines, as that tends to happen when new rapid transit lines are opened. However, I’m not sure it would in this instance, at least not to the same extent as in other systems, since the only transfer point is at Waterfront and that’s a long way down to go when someone who lives at metrotown, say, can just hop on the 49 bus to the Canada Line if they’re going to Richmond.

Numbers on SkyTrain in the morning and evening don’t seem to have changed since Canada Line opened. I am seeing more people will luggage though. There have always been a few bus/train passengers going to/from Pacific Central on Main street, but there are now more passengers with bags going to/from Waterfront. I’m actually shocked because I thought only the backpacking generation hauled bags on public transit, but I’m seeing middle aged women struggling with multiple suitcases.

Tessa is completely right about needing a complete network. The problem is that we can’t afford to build that network using the SkyTrain/Rotem technology that’s been used up until now.

Using a less expensive technology would allow far more lines in more cities going in more directions. For example the proposed Evergreen line will have zero effect on people travelling between Surrey and Coquitlam. The route would be long and involve multiple transfers. Driving or taking a direct bus, if there is one, would be both faster and easier.

Surrey is going to become this region’s second major city in the next 25 years. It’s going to need a network of high capacity transit routes fanning out in all directions. If we follow the direction set by current and past governments all we’re going to have is a short SkyTrain extension to Fleetwood and the promise of a further extension to Langley.

David — I agree that it would be insane to build an entire network with Skytrain technology. Trying to give Surrey a decent skeleton of rail transit with Skytrains, rather than LRT, would just be nuts. For what it’s worth, I’m also very skeptical that light metro makes sense for the Evergreen line.

But I think a lot of good cities with good transit have networks that consist of a full-spectrum mix of subways or els, at-grade rail, and buses. So I think metro Vancouver is starting from am OK position with a backbone of light metros to build out from. And I do also wonder if one more metro line — along the most heavily-traveled by transit, TOD-ified east-west corridor in the region — doesn’t also make sense. (Although as I keep emphasizing, I could go either way on that one.)

I suppose one thing I should be more explicit about is that I think we *ought* to be spending close to an oder of magnitude more than we are on building new transit infrastructure. I look at a map of, say, Copenhagen’s or Frankfurt’s rail networks and think, “We’re rich! Why don’t we just build that?” So when i hear worries about the cost of metros, I just think, “Okay, so spend more!” (As Niles Crane once said, “If less is more, think how much more MORE will be!”)

Good point on the 49 and 41 routes. That would be another great query to Translink.

And good point on the surrey to Coquitlam route. It would be really cool if they could set it up so that you could run a direct train from Coquitlam to Surrey. Doubt they will, though it would be really cool. Possible, too, just probably expensive and require a fair number of upgrades, likely involving service delays.